Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 118 F.3d 122 - Ferris v. Cuevas

Ferris v. Cuevas’s Empirical Analysis

118 F.3d 122 · 1997

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
October 2022
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently October 2022 · most notably Hoblock v. Albany County Board of Elections (2005), Gospel Missions of America v. City of Los Angeles (2003)

14 federal appellate · 1 district ·

2201997200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1738

Relies on Allen v. McCurry · Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Group of Boston, Inc. · Ryan v. New York Telephone Co. · O'Brien v. City of Syracuse · Smith v. Russell Sage College

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “we are required to make an independent examination of the record as a whole without deference to the factual findings of the trial court.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““once a claim is brought to a final conclusion, all other claims arising out of the same transaction or series of transactions are barred, even if based upon different theories or if seeking a different remedy.” ... “[U]nder the ‘transactional analysis’ approach adopted by the [New York State] Court of Appeals, the doctrine of res judicata also operates to preclude the litigation of matters that could have or should have been raised in a prior proceeding arising from the same ‘factual grouping,’ ‘transaction,’ or ‘series of transactions.’ ”... Following a valid final judgment, therefore, res judicata bars future litigation between the same parties, or those in privity with them, on the same cause of action.’”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “involvement in and control of every aspect of both the state and federal actions presents a connection of much greater magnitude than identity of interest alone.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.